Saturday, September 6, 2008

Bruce N. Fisk, Westmont CollegePaul among the Storytellers: Reading Romans 11 in the Context of Rewritten BiblePaul and his non-Christian Jewish contemporaries inherited many of the same exegetical traditions, adopted some of the same interpretive techniques and generally inhabited the same hermeneutical space. This paper will consider ways in which Paul's use of Scripture in Romans 11 shares this exegetical heritage with the authors of (so-called) Rewritten Bible, in terms of shared techniques and parallel appeals to post-biblical tradition, and in terms of their shared understanding of the nature of Scripture (as gapped, relevant, harmonious, self-interpreting and inspired) and of God (as trustworthy and fundamentally loyal to Israel).

Paper will be summarized, not read. Copies of the papers are available in advance here at the seminar's website: http://paulandscripture.blogspot.com.

Session 2: Theme: Paul and Context

Mark Given, Missouri State University, Presiding

Stephen Moyise, University of ChichesterDoes Paul Respect the Context of His Scriptural Quotations, and Does It Matter?For some scholars, the fact that Paul can quote a text like Isa 52:5 in Rom 2:24 and Isa 52:7 in Rom 10:15 is clear evidence that Paul respects the context of his quotations. For other scholars, the Sarah and Hagar allegory of Galatians 4 and the "muzzle the ox" quotations in 1 Cor 9:9 is clear evidence that he did not. There are also a number of mediating positions such as (1) Paul shows awareness of the context but is not bound by it (2) Paul does not respect the context from a modern historical-critical perspective but does from a first-century perspective (3) Paul modifies the meaning of individual verses but respects their context from a larger canonical or salvation-history perspective. It is also clear that this is not simply an academic question but carries moral implications for Paul's integrity and perhaps even for the faith or non-faith of the individual scholar. In this paper, I will explore whether agreement in the meaning of key words such as "respect" and "context" could lead to some sort of consensus or whether these scholarly differences are the result of different presuppositions.